The Legendary History of Ron Paul

I’ll admit, I was skeptical about Ron Paul. I thought he was just some libertarian kook who couldn’t win any office other than the one in his congressional district. But finally, I have found what everyone in his fanbase is raving about. You see, Ron Paul is no ordinary congressman. Nay, he is a legend. A fabled hero who is destined to save this country from utter ruin.

Let us begin with the history of our hero.

Ronald Ernest Paul Sr. was born in the colony of Virginia in 1704. As a teenager, he often spoke of patriotism and the need for us to abandon all ties with Mother England. In fact, Ron Paul actually coined the phrase “no taxation without representation.” On a bright summer day in 1736, Ron encountered a bear in the woods near his farmhouse. Fearlessly, he managed to strangle the bear to near-death with his bare hands, only to finish the job by beating it with his own shoes. The townspeople of his village rejoiced, as the bear had eaten many children in the area.

In 1775, at the ripe old age of seventy-one, he was elected to the Second Continental Congress. His ideas for the founding of a new nation were strikingly on-par with that of Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Paine, and Patrick Henry.

On July 4th, 1776, as John Hancock was just finishing his signature, Ron Paul reached for the quill and was denied by Hancock, only to be told, “No, Ronald. This country needs you for something greater.” Thus, the founding fathers gathered together and unanimously decided that Ron Paul was to be the eternal protector of the Declaration of Independence.

In order to allow for Ron Paul’s long life, the founding fathers sought the help of a local Virginian witch, who gave him an elixir that would grant him long, and quasi-natural life. The witch was subsequently hanged for witchcraft. Of course, prior to that, she was allowed habeas corpus and subjected to a trial by jury.

With a new vitality, Ron Paul continued to fight the good fight for American liberty. He authored the Articles of Confederation, which were adopted in 1777. He felt that this was a permanent solution to American government. The states were loosely joined together, yet each had one vote in the unicameral legislature. Ron Paul considered this system nothing short of ideal.

By the time 1788 rolled around, America hungered for a change in government. A new Constitution was on the horizon. While Ron Paul was reluctant to accept such a change that would increase the size of federal government, he inevitably supported the Constitution and swore to protect it forever. The relationship between him and the Constitution continued to blossom throughout the rest of his life.

After 1789, Ron Paul was relegated to comfortable obscurity until 1858, when the Lincoln-Douglas debates began. Stephen Douglas favored popular sovreignty to solve the problem of slavery, believing that states and territories should decide for themselves whether or not they would allow slavery. This ideology was exactly that of Ron Paul’s. Slavery was an issue that should be decided by the states, not by the federal government.

So Ron Paul fought Abraham Lincoln every step of the way. He abhorred Lincoln’s attempts to abolish slavery on a federal level, even though Paul himself personally opposed slavery. He even aligned himself with the Confederate States of America, feeling that their views on states’ rights were on par with that of the founding fathers.

Paul also had other problems with Lincoln. He argued that Lincoln was invading a sovereign nation when Lincoln sent Union armies into Confederate territory. He also hated the way Lincoln temporarily suspended habeas corpus, spent Federal money without Congressional approval, and imprisoned 18,000 Confederate soldiers without trial. Outraged, he nailed a copy of the U.S. Constitution to the White House doors, which reportedly took him 3 hours.

Fortunately for Ron Paul, he was able to hire actor John Wilkes Booth to put an end to the madness of Lincoln’s administration. Paul would not be heard from again until the 20th century.

By the time 1915 rolled around, Ron Paul was urging Americans not to enter World War I, claiming that the sinking of the Lusitania was a result of blowback from aiding England against Germany. He hated Woodrow Wilson’s policies just as bad as Lincoln’s.

When 1920 came along to dawn that decade of decadence, Ron Paul fought tooth and nail against the 19th amendment, claiming that the founding fathers would have never extended the right to vote to women.

In late 1941, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Paul formed an overwhelming rapport among those who believed that the attack was an inside job perpetrated by the U.S. government. He absolutely loathed Roosevelt’s New Deal programs, claiming that they enlarged the size of federal government. He also fought against the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947.

With the exception of Ronald Reagan, Ron Paul opposed the policies of every single President since Rutherford B. Hayes. He also fiercely stood against the creation of the departments of Housing, Transportation, Energy, Education, Veteran’s Affairs, and Homeland Security.

When 1974 rolled around, Ron Paul made an unsuccessful attempt at running for the 22nd district of Texas. Luckily, his opponent was appointed to head of the Federal Maritime Commission and he won a special election in 1976, only serving six months before losing again. He did win a re-match in 1978, going on to be re-elected again in 1980 and 1982.

He tried to run for U.S. Senate in 1984, but was defeated in the primaries. He then returned to the practice of saving lives and delivering babies as a medical doctor, a practice he had perfected since 1883.

In 1988, Ron Paul finally decided that he could enter a public foray as a candidate for President of the United States. He ran as a Libertarian, regardless of his support for Republican President Reagan. He lost by quite a substantial margin, relegated to the ranks of his fellow third-party candidates David Duke and Willa Kenoyer.

By 1996, Ron Paul had returned to Congress, representing the 22nd district of Texas once more. He won subsequent elections in 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004, and 2006.

Throughout all his long life, there has not been a single documented account of Ron Paul laughing at something that was humorous. When asked about this in 2006, he said, “I take my job as a Congressman too seriously to indulge in something as frivolous as humor. Humor can be dishonest and at best unscrupulous. Furthermore, the Constitution simply would not allow for me as an elected official in the federal government to partake in it.”

But now the time has come for Ron Paul to fulfill his promise that he made to his fellow founding fathers over 200 years ago. He is destined to prevail as President of the United States in 2008. He will ride his white horse to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in victory.

You see, Ron Paul understands the Constitution perfectly because he was present at its inception. He knows the will of the founding fathers because he in fact was one of them. He understands the history of America and its departure from its original values because he has been there all along.

Ron Paul knows the path to America’s greatness because he has trodden it for all his life. He cannot lose this election since he is the perfect candidate in every way.

Yes, I understand Ron Paul now. Now, I get what all the hype is all about.

Yeah! I guess you showed those Ron Paul supporters. Finally, a blog with some real substance and teeth. Now lets all get busy to elect the next CFR member so we can bomb the crap out of Iran, kill another 600,000 of those Muslim rag-heads, borrow another trillion dollars to pay for it, and then cause a total economic collapse. Anyone who would actually vote for Ron Paul, peace, prosperity, liberty and restoring the constitution must be wearing a tin foil hat. Nice blog. Job well done. Keep up the good work.

Briggs, you just keep on with your crazy beliefs that the 19th amendment wasn’t necessary.

Desert Rat, did I actually say any of those things?

Ilah, weak? It’s satirical historical fiction.

Brent, I’m not sure why you stopped.

Valerie, if I’m wrong about the 22nd district, then so is Wikipedia. Not the only thing I got wrong? How about my premise? This was a joke!

Ed, of course I know what an FRN is. I’ve got a few in my pocket. What does the gold standard or fiat currency have to do with this post? I almost deleted your comment because I thought it was spam, but then I realized you were serious.

Folks, this is satire. Now I know that most of you Ron Paul supporters out there don’t have a sense of humor. That’s okay. But don’t get on here and say, “you didn’t get this right!” I mean, are you kidding me? Maybe you are. That’s cool, I can take a joke ;-).

Thank you, Hector. Granted, I don’t really think that Ron Paul would’ve considered Pearl Harbor an inside job. I was just making historical comparisons to some of Dr. Paul’s modern-day stances and associations in a satirical fashion. Naturally, I embellished, but then again it is a tall-tale isn’t it?

Actually, Braden, I asked if you could show me where women did not have the right to vote before the 19th was added. I guess you couldn’t find it because you provided defamation not explanation. Good job. Mitt must be proud.

That’s like asking me if I could show you where slaves could be allowed to vote. Sometimes Amendments exist to guarantee or ensure rights rather than to simply correct a previous law. How did I provide defamation? Because I said your belief that the 19th Amendment was unnecessary was crazy? You’ll have to forgive me; I was under the impression you had a thicker skin.

Which position would you like refuted? Frankly, I agree with some of them. But I think some of the other ones are unrealistic and short-sighted.

You know, one of the reasons I wrote this blog is to poke fun at the way his supporters revere him as some sort of American messiah destined to rid the world of all its problems through his “superior insight” into the Constitution.

Ron Paul is a man of principle, I’ll grant you. But he’s not going to win this primary, much less the general election. If it’s because of conservatives with a sense of humor like myself, so be it. But I hardly think that I’d be the one to stifle the unquestionable significance of Ron Paul.

Then name and refute a position which is “unrealistic and short-sighted” instead of just claiming that you can. “Poking fun” by lying about Ron Paul’s supporters is dishonest. He and his supporters all agree that – far from seeing him as some sort of messiah – it is the message of indiviualism and liberty that sets him – and them – apart from the establishment collectivists. It is the libertarian, constitutionalist message, not the man which is important. Characterizing Ron Paul supporters as blind and faithful followers of one man is exactly the opposite of the truth. And not at all humorous – just dishonest.

Did I lie about Ron Paul’s supporters, John? I dare not think you speak on behalf of all Ron Paul supporters, do you? Perhaps you are their spokesman. I was previously unaware.

John, lighten up. Politics is a crazy business and if you can’t laugh at some of the things people say and do, then I guess you just don’t have an open-minded sense of humor. That’s fine. It’s your right.

I wrote this as political satire in order for people to compare Ron Paul’s current positions to American history in a humorous, and (gasp!) exaggerated way. So go ahead and call me “dishonest” because I tried to make some people laugh. I know how the fate of the entire world rests on whether or not Ron Paul wins this election and that’s not something anyone can laugh about.

Ooh, that’s one thing I should have put in the story: how Ron Paul never laughed a day in his life because he considered humor to be “dishonest.” Thanks for adding fuel to the flame, John. Guys like you make me laugh.

Lying? I’m still not sure what I lied about. Please show me. Snide sarcasm? Guilty as charged, though I hope you would grant me the privilege of habeas corpus and a trial by a jury of my peers.

Clever? I’m flattered. Little? I’m sorry but my avatar picture was taken 20 pounds ago and thus may be a bit deceptive. Intellectual? Why thank you, how kind. A cheat? Hmm…. well since you called me clever and intellectual, I’ll let that one slide.

Women’s sufferage was in place in Wyomin in 1890 . . . most western states had women’s sufferage by the turn of the century. Illinoise, the biggest midwest state, had woman’s sufferage by 1913. New York, the biggest eastern state, gave women’s sufferage in 1917. The 19th Amendment to the federal US Constitution did not come into being until 1920.

Just in case anyone is wondering, we do not have national elections. Each state elects its own members of US Senate and members of US Congress; each state elects its electoral college members in the US presidential election. So sufferage in a state means full sufferage in elections for any and all federal offices that are subject to election by voters.